Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Columbus Dispatch)   Man, I'm running late to the county jail to administer a drug test, I guess I can stop at Starbucks, what's the worst that could happen?   (dispatch.com) divider line 90
    More: Fail, State Highway Patrol, jail, road intersections, Brian Krebs, vehicular homicide, east side  
•       •       •

15036 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Dec 2013 at 1:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-12-20 01:44:26 PM  
That story pissed me off a bit.
 
2013-12-20 01:45:52 PM  
Kurt Sutter?
 
2013-12-20 01:45:56 PM  
Horrible breath?
 
2013-12-20 01:46:18 PM  
Krebs, Licking County, Branstool? This story sounds like a map to the Cleveland Show.
 
2013-12-20 01:47:15 PM  
I'm really not trying to troll here, this just caught my eye

FTA : "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

You could actually do that on a different day, if you wanted.

Also yes, terribly unfair, bad trooper, bad justice etc.
 
2013-12-20 01:47:37 PM  
OK, criminal charges are out. But surely the family can still file an at fault/civil suit? (Like they'd get anything either way)
 
2013-12-20 01:48:05 PM  
That's the law. Oh well.
 
2013-12-20 01:49:35 PM  

walktoanarcade: That story pissed me off a bit.


This, and someone misspelled Anthony.
 
2013-12-20 01:49:45 PM  
by Licking County Common Pleas Judge David Branstool

Is that how he got off?

/hey-o
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-12-20 01:50:09 PM  
Anthany J. Krebs slammed his car into the back of a motorcycle driven by Randle D. O'Bryan, of Pataskala, on June 3. O'Bryan, 44, was stopped in traffic on eastbound Rt. 16 west of the Cherry Valley Road intersection near Newark. He died that evening at Licking Memorial Hospital.

This would be a straightforward misdemeanor motor vehicle homicide case around here. Alcohol is an aggravating factor. If you permanently suck at driving it's a misdemeanor and if you temporarily suck at driving it's a felony.
 
2013-12-20 01:51:43 PM  
i2.cdnds.net
 
2013-12-20 01:52:20 PM  
"He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.
 
2013-12-20 01:54:18 PM  
Thanks to Google and the ridiculous spelling of his name I'm guessing the driver's job search will be difficult.
 
2013-12-20 01:56:21 PM  
That's some good policing there, Lou.
 
2013-12-20 01:57:19 PM  
Louder pipes on either vehicle could surely have prevented this tragedy.
 
2013-12-20 01:57:34 PM  
Well... sucks to be you, prosecutor.  If you break the law to secure a conviction, you don't get a conviction.  This is entirely correct and proper.

Fear the Clam: If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.


Eh, there are things that are more dangerous than motorcycles.

Smart cars, for instance, are designed like the maker is  trying to kill you.
 
2013-12-20 01:58:37 PM  
A urine sample supplied by Krebs, 29, of 6079 Rover Lane on the East Side, tested positive for both amphetamines and marijuana.

That doesn't mean that he was high at the time
 
2013-12-20 01:58:55 PM  

Loaf's Tray: Louder pipes on either vehicle could surely have prevented this tragedy.


Longer pipes certainly would have.

Like, 300 feet or so.
 
2013-12-20 01:59:20 PM  

Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.


As long as he had a nice AD&D policy I'd cut him some slack. He could have been terribly henpecked and rising was his only therapy
 
2013-12-20 01:59:57 PM  
Did you mean:  Anthony J. Krebs
 
2013-12-20 02:00:23 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Smart cars, for instance, are designed like the maker is  trying to kill you.


I thought they were actually somewhat safe, not for your image or self esteem of course...
 
2013-12-20 02:01:23 PM  
I don't understand why criminal charges are out. Do you have to be drunk to be accused of vehicular homicide now?
 
2013-12-20 02:01:23 PM  
not surprising from a Krebs descendant.

www.nitesite.net

/sad story
//no real justice here
 
2013-12-20 02:01:40 PM  
[something....something something]...KREBS CYCLE!

//YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
 
2013-12-20 02:01:41 PM  
Other  than some speed (which truck drivers have demonstrated for decades only improves safety on the road) the guy had been smoking pot.

Is it the  courts position that the accident was a result of marijuana use?
 
2013-12-20 02:01:46 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: As long as he had a nice AD&D policy I'd cut him some slack.


because he gets a saving throw?
 
2013-12-20 02:02:59 PM  
I don't get it. Why would the time matter that much? As long as the idiot isn't taking any new drugs there should be any negative (for the accused) effect on intoxication levels. Sure, you don't force the guy to go and have the alcohol test the next saturday at 23:00, but 2 minutes outside of the 3 hours? What is the rationale.behind that?

If you can hold him for an X amount of time, then it should be possible to test him for the same duration.
 
2013-12-20 02:03:24 PM  

Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.


I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

Also, can't drugs show up in a urine test days, or even weeks after you use them?
 
2013-12-20 02:03:56 PM  
Tragic all around, but...

Was the driver actually intoxicated at the scene, or was the state interested in charging him with the more serious crime simply because there were detectable amounts of certain substances in his bloodstream?

Did the driver have a history of DWI or run-ins with the law or did he have a clean record before this?

Those are some damn important factors to this story that are missing-- I don't know if I should be seriously pissed off or going "tsk tsk."

The reporter didn't do a very good job on this story at all.  Back in my news editor days I would have given him a major ass chewing and kicked him out to finish the goddamn story I was paying him to write.

/I sometimes miss being a grumpy newspaper editor.  It was fun at times.
//Reporters under me almost never did a half assed job twice.
 
2013-12-20 02:04:08 PM  

Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.


I bet you hate coal miners and oil rig workers too.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-12-20 02:04:22 PM  
Dalrint

In many states, alcohol is the difference between a minor moving violation and a serious crime. I have always thought this was backwards -- it's worse to knowingly drive dangerously than to be too drunk to realize you are in a car -- but it is the law.
 
2013-12-20 02:05:09 PM  

Loaf's Tray: Louder pipes on either vehicle could surely have prevented this tragedy.


I was trying to think of a way to work firearms into the equation... but that works equally well.
 
2013-12-20 02:05:19 PM  
So, if I cause an accident and can run and hide for three hours, I get sweet, sweet, freedom? Sounds like the premise for a great new reality show "Hit and Run".
 
2013-12-20 02:05:45 PM  
He went to licking and stopped ticking.
 
2013-12-20 02:06:04 PM  

si0.twimg.com


R.I.P Anthony J. Krebs

 
2013-12-20 02:07:25 PM  

ReapTheChaos: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

Also, can't drugs show up in a urine test days, or even weeks after you use them?


Yeap
 
2013-12-20 02:07:31 PM  
What a bunch of sh*t.  If the suspect is in custody since immediately after the accident and still tests positive for drugs, WTF difference does it make how long it was?
 
2013-12-20 02:10:08 PM  
Call logs showed that the Granville officers were dispatched at 5:28 p.m., meaning that Krebs' urine was collected two minutes too late. It could not be used as evidence against him.

You know, there is a difference between Dispatched and On the Scene. You can be dispatched at 5:28 but arrive on the scene at 5:55.
 
2013-12-20 02:10:21 PM  
"Granville officers were dispatched at 5:28 p.m."
That is the time they were dispatched. Did they arrive instantly? How do they know the incident really happened if an officer had not seen it yet? Should they wait, and not arrive until there is a drug test guy waiting two blocks away?
 
2013-12-20 02:10:32 PM  

DerAppie: I don't get it. Why would the time matter that much? As long as the idiot isn't taking any new drugs there should be any negative (for the accused) effect on intoxication levels. Sure, you don't force the guy to go and have the alcohol test the next saturday at 23:00, but 2 minutes outside of the 3 hours? What is the rationale.behind that?


Because that's the way the law was written. If we allow a bit of "slip-time", how long do we let it slide? 1 minute? 3? 5? 10? 15?

It sucks, but this is why it pays to elect people who can both read AND think critically.

// the blame lies with the LEOs, who are supposed to know these things
 
2013-12-20 02:12:30 PM  

Mietsko: I'm really not trying to troll here, this just caught my eye

FTA : "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

You could actually do that on a different day, if you wanted.



Maybe New Year's Day...hey kids, it's a new year without your dad!!

/sad
 
2013-12-20 02:12:44 PM  
If we're going to start changing farked up laws how about changing ones that will keep more people out of prison before we start adding more people in.
 
2013-12-20 02:12:59 PM  

uncleacid: He went to licking and stopped ticking.


oh my god, this made me laugh really hard. Thankfully all of my coworkers are gone.
 
2013-12-20 02:14:17 PM  

Riche: Tragic all around, but...

Was the driver actually intoxicated at the scene, or was the state interested in charging him with the more serious crime simply because there were detectable amounts of certain substances in his bloodstream?

Did the driver have a history of DWI or run-ins with the law or did he have a clean record before this?

Those are some damn important factors to this story that are missing-- I don't know if I should be seriously pissed off or going "tsk tsk."

The reporter didn't do a very good job on this story at all.  Back in my news editor days I would have given him a major ass chewing and kicked him out to finish the goddamn story I was paying him to write.

/I sometimes miss being a grumpy newspaper editor.  It was fun at times.
//Reporters under me almost never did a half assed job twice.


I agree with most of your questions and your assertion that the story needs more details,however I believe that is the point of the time limit on taking the urine/blood sample.  And why the charge was ultimately dismissed.  Sad story overall though.
 
2013-12-20 02:14:23 PM  
I'm guessing there were no witnesses to the accident and Stoney insists the motorcycle pulled out in front of him from a side road that isn't there and just stopped. So the cops can't pin the accident on him. All they can do is get him tested and show that he was baked. And that increases the chance of getting convicted.

/GED in Elle Aye Double U
 
2013-12-20 02:14:36 PM  
Not sure about you other FARKERS out there, but if that happened to my family and this guy walks free....


/ dead man walking
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-12-20 02:16:37 PM  
DerAppie

Ohio law sets a time limit of three hours. The limit used to be two hours.

In the USA there are two extremes on test timing. One doctrine says expert testimony on "retrograde extrapolation" can be used to translate any after-the-fact BAC measurement into the BAC at time of the crime. The other says the test is what matters, and a test within some time after driving is legally the same as a test while driving. Massachusetts is in the first camp, New Jersey in the second. Apparently Ohio is also in the second.

In the second kind of state proving that your BAC was 0.0% when you drove would not be a defense to a charge of DUI alcohol. At most it would raise doubt that the later test was accurate.
 
2013-12-20 02:16:53 PM  
Here's an older story. He got idicted on two counts. Wonder what happened to the other one.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/09/19/Newark-fatal - wreck-indictment.html
NEWARK, Ohio - A Licking County grand jury indicted a Columbus man on Wednesday on two counts of vehicular homicide stemming from a June crash near here.

On the afternoon of his 29th birthday, Anthany J. Krebs rear-ended a motorcycle driven by Randle D. O'Bryan of Pataskala traveling east on Rt. 16 near the Cherry Valley Road intersection, according to a State Highway Patrol report. O'Bryan, 44, died at Licking Memorial Hospital.

Krebs, of Rover Lane on the East Side, was indicted on two counts of vehicular homicide - one count for being under the influence, a second-degree felony, and one count for recklessness, a third-degree felony, said Assistant Licking County Prosecutor Paula Sawyer.

Krebs, who tested positive for both amphetamines and marijuana, was also indicted on one count of driving while intoxicated and a misdemeanor count of possession of marijuana. His court date has not yet been set.
 
2013-12-20 02:17:14 PM  
Farkin' deadlines.
How do they work?
 
2013-12-20 02:19:59 PM  

ReapTheChaos: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

Also, can't drugs show up in a urine test days, or even weeks after you use them?


IIRC weed shows up in your system for about three weeks after last smoked, not sure about eating or other methods. I think meth is a few days, but I haven't let my PO check me in months. Hard to test me when I move around from state to state, walking from town to town. Sure the sheriffs always give me shiat, cause I look like a vagrant. I get by though.
 
2013-12-20 02:25:05 PM  

ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?


I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.
 
2013-12-20 02:32:53 PM  

tampaflacouple: Not sure about you other FARKERS out there, but if that happened to my family and this guy walks free....


/ dead man walking


FTFA:  Anthany J. Krebs slammed his car into the back of a motorcycle driven by Randle D. O'Bryan

Since the article was written to imply it was done with planning and malice, then I'd tend to agree.

On the other hand, I have no idea what time of day, road conditions, etc... so it could have just been an accident. It appears the only reason he was charged with a felony is because of the test results, which we don't know if they impaired his driving at the time either.
 
2013-12-20 02:33:25 PM  

lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.


I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted
 
2013-12-20 02:34:30 PM  
Was it one of those wide glide type motorcycles that are fairly quiet or was it a Harley?
 
2013-12-20 02:35:11 PM  

Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.


constroyer.com

THIS! I want to get my private pilot's license and a motorcycle. But until my kids are in college that's not going to happen. My wants come second to their needs. I'm not expecting to live forever and crap happens, but at least load the dice before you roll them.
 
2013-12-20 02:35:32 PM  

Dr Dreidel: DerAppie: I don't get it. Why would the time matter that much? As long as the idiot isn't taking any new drugs there should be any negative (for the accused) effect on intoxication levels. Sure, you don't force the guy to go and have the alcohol test the next saturday at 23:00, but 2 minutes outside of the 3 hours? What is the rationale.behind that?

Because that's the way the law was written. If we allow a bit of "slip-time", how long do we let it slide? 1 minute? 3? 5? 10? 15?

It sucks, but this is why it pays to elect people who can both read AND think critically.

// the blame lies with the LEOs, who are supposed to know these things


That's not an answer to the question I asked. "That is the way the law was written" does not explain the rationale behind the why the law was written that way.

ZAZ: Thanks, that was informative. It makes at least some sense. But I still wonder if a test that shows levels of intoxication should be discarded simply because some arbitrary time limit has been passed. I get that extrapolating becomes more inaccurate the more time passes, but if the test starts at "he was intoxicated" there really isn't that much of a need to get his levels from 3 hours earlier.
 
2013-12-20 02:36:22 PM  
Well... I guess it's up to the deceased's family to enact justice as it's denied on a technicality.
 
2013-12-20 02:37:18 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.

I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted


I feel the same way about guys in dump trucks when I pull up behind them in my PANAMAX tanker. Especially if it's Exxon oil in it, because that means I'm always wasted.
 
2013-12-20 02:38:56 PM  

DerAppie: That's not an answer to the question I asked.


Ah. I read "Why would it matter" as "why would it matter to the LEOs", not "why would it matter to the legislature".
 
2013-12-20 02:38:57 PM  

Mrbogey: Well... I guess it's up to the deceased's family to enact justice as it's denied on a technicality.


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-12-20 02:44:28 PM  

MadMattressMack: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.

I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted

I feel the same way about guys in dump trucks when I pull up behind them in my PANAMAX tanker. Especially if it's Exxon oil in it, because that means I'm always wasted.



Well, I mean, driving a tanker wasted is a bad idea but you gotta admit, if the guy in the dump truck was driving another tanker, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt.  Accidents happen.  You may be responsible for it but how is it your fault if you chose to drive a tanker and that irresponsible asshole is on the road with just a dump truck?

/i lol'd at the Exxon joke
 
2013-12-20 02:45:45 PM  

TomD9938: Other  than some speed (which truck drivers have demonstrated for decades only improves safety on the road) the guy had been smoking pot.

Is it the  courts position that the accident was a result of marijuana use?


Right because mind altering drugs and heavy machines go together so well.

Put yourself in the family's shoes. What if your kid/parent/etc had been killed?
 
2013-12-20 02:48:49 PM  

GrizzlyPouch: TomD9938: Other  than some speed (which truck drivers have demonstrated for decades only improves safety on the road) the guy had been smoking pot.

Is it the  courts position that the accident was a result of marijuana use?

Right because mind altering drugs and heavy machines go together so well.

Put yourself in the family's shoes. What if your kid/parent/etc had been killed?


Anybody who harms a hair on my etc's head is a dead motherfarker...
 
2013-12-20 02:51:45 PM  
GrizzlyPouch:

Right because mind altering drugs and heavy machines go together so well.

If dude was on the amount of speed I've seen speedfreaks use, he was probably glued to the rearview mirror panicking about that late-model Taurus behind him which is clearly an undercover DEA agent oh crap is that helicopter following me BUGS BUGS THERE'S BUGS ALL OVER MY SKIN BUGS
 
2013-12-20 02:57:29 PM  
Looks like someone in the victim's family needs to "accidentally" run his ass over, and then mysteriously there is a screw up in one part of the investigation so the case gets tossed.

Seriously, this is our justice system?  A small error results in a guy, who isn't denying he killed someone, getting off scot-free?
 
2013-12-20 03:04:20 PM  

Riche: Tragic all around, but...

Was the driver actually intoxicated at the scene, or was the state interested in charging him with the more serious crime simply because there were detectable amounts of certain substances in his bloodstream?

Did the driver have a history of DWI or run-ins with the law or did he have a clean record before this?

Those are some damn important factors to this story that are missing-- I don't know if I should be seriously pissed off or going "tsk tsk."

The reporter didn't do a very good job on this story at all.  Back in my news editor days I would have given him a major ass chewing and kicked him out to finish the goddamn story I was paying him to write.

/I sometimes miss being a grumpy newspaper editor.  It was fun at times.
//Reporters under me almost never did a half assed job twice.


According tone of the commentors, he's done this sort of thing before, DUIIs and hit-skip (which is Ohioan for hit-and-run, I gather). Even w/o the blood test, shouldn't they be getting him on a "failure to operate safely"-type rule?

/IANAOD
//I Am Not An Ohio Driver
 
2013-12-20 03:09:38 PM  

drjekel_mrhyde: ReapTheChaos: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

Also, can't drugs show up in a urine test days, or even weeks after you use them?

Yeap


Amphetamines have a half-life of around ten hours. Depending on the amount in his system, either he took 1 dose before the crash or 3.2 doses a week ago (by my math.)
 
2013-12-20 03:10:07 PM  

FatherChaos: Looks like someone in the victim's family needs to "accidentally" run his ass over, and then mysteriously there is a screw up in one part of the investigation so the case gets tossed.

Seriously, this is our justice system?  A small error results in a guy, who isn't denying he killed someone, getting off scot-free?


The fact that there is no evidence, at least no evidence was shown in the article, that a crime was committed.

Having detectable amounts of emphetamines and marijuana in his blood stream does not mean he was intoxicated at the time of the accident. If the only chance the prosecuted had to prove he was intoxicated was a blood test showing detectable amounts of emphetamines and marijuana he would most likely have never gotten a conviction.

Bloodshot eyes, abnormal behavior, slow speech, the smell of marijuana, half smoked joint in the ash tray are pieces of evidence the prosecuted could have used to get a conviction. Apparently he only had a little too late blood test. Looks to me like there wasn't a crime committed, it was just an accident.
 
2013-12-20 03:14:44 PM  

lennavan: MadMattressMack: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.

I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted

I feel the same way about guys in dump trucks when I pull up behind them in my PANAMAX tanker. Especially if it's Exxon oil in it, because that means I'm always wasted.

Well, I mean, driving a tanker wasted is a bad idea but you gotta admit, if the guy in the dump truck was driving another tanker, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt.  Accidents happen.  You may be responsible for it but how is it your fault if you chose to drive a tanker and that irresponsible asshole is on the road with just a dump truck?

/i lol'd at the Exxon joke


He deserved it, ya know. The way he was dressed, he was just beggin' for some action, right?
 
2013-12-20 03:15:39 PM  

MadMattressMack: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

[constroyer.com image 480x319]

THIS! I want to get my private pilot's license and a motorcycle. But until my kids are in college that's not going to happen. My wants come second to their needs. I'm not expecting to live forever and crap happens, but at least load the dice before you roll them.


Yup, because he rode a motorcycle you can now profess he simply did not care about his wife and kids. Whenever someone does something that in any way to puts their life in any kind of danger - even mildly! - they simply give no shiats about their wife and kids, and thank goodness we have you and the shiathead you quoted to pass judgement on them. Great job!
 
2013-12-20 03:16:41 PM  
3.2 seven days ago doesn't seem right. Need more coffee.
 
2013-12-20 03:20:27 PM  
something's wrong.
If I hit and kill someone, I may get bail but not freedom
Then again, if you go on trial for the wrong thing and get a not guilty verdict..
 
2013-12-20 03:24:21 PM  
so guy high on meth runs over his meth dealer.  don't they just cancel each other out?
 
2013-12-20 03:31:57 PM  
2013-12-20 02:14:36 PM
Not sure about you other FARKERS out there, but if that happened to my family and this guy walks free....


/ dead man walking



cue the Internet Tough Guy please.
 
2013-12-20 03:37:02 PM  

minuslars: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

I bet you hate coal miners and oil rig workers too.


Riding motorcycles is a job now?
 
2013-12-20 03:40:43 PM  

Cold_Sassy: What a bunch of sh*t.  If the suspect is in custody since immediately after the accident and still tests positive for drugs, WTF difference does it make how long it was?


That's what I was wondering.  Are they trying to say if you hold your piss for 3 hours you get to go home?
 
2013-12-20 03:56:13 PM  

MHudson: Yup, because he rode a motorcycle you can now profess he simply did not care about his wife and kids. Whenever someone does something that in any way to puts their life in any kind of danger - even mildly! - they simply give no shiats about their wife and kids, and thank goodness we have you and the shiathead you quoted to pass judgement on them. Great job!


Well, if he cared enough to not ride a motorcycle and took a car instead then odds are he would be alive. NHTS says motorcycle riders are 35x more likely to die in a wreck. 35x is not mildly more dangerous. That's a lot. But his want to ride took precedence over his want to preserve his life for his wife and children. If this wasn't the case then he would've been in a car.

Look, the wreck wasn't his fault. But just because something isn't your fault doesn't mean you're not going to have to pay a toll. He paid the highest toll.

pancakeface: I bet you hate coal miners and oil rig workers too.

Riding motorcycles is a job now?


OSHA actively makes and enforces laws requiring those workers to wear day glow / reflective protective suits, helmets, and other PPE while motorcycle groups campaign for the exact opposite.
 
2013-12-20 04:02:09 PM  

pancakeface: minuslars: Fear the Clam: "He gets to have a Christmas," Stepp said of Krebs. "It's not fair. I have to take my kids to the grave to see their father on Christmas."

If he actually gave a shait about you or his kids he wouldn't have been riding a motorcycle in the first place.

I bet you hate coal miners and oil rig workers too.

Riding motorcycles is a job now?


It was for these dashing fellows..

renatofelix.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-12-20 04:02:30 PM  

Too Pretty For Prison: Cold_Sassy: What a bunch of sh*t.  If the suspect is in custody since immediately after the accident and still tests positive for drugs, WTF difference does it make how long it was?

That's what I was wondering.  Are they trying to say if you hold your piss for 3 hours you get to go home?


I'm amazed they didn't do a blood draw since it was a fatality. I think in TX if you're in any fatality accident then you get a mandatory blood draw.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-12-20 04:18:00 PM  
That's what I was wondering. Are they trying to say if you hold your piss for 3 hours you get to go home?

There are two possible outcomes. One, as mentioned above, is a forcible test. I think the latest precedent says they need a warrant. They can get a warrant, but at least you aren't being slammed against a cop car while a methed up officer tries to find a vein. The other outcome is you get charged with test refusal. This is typically similar to a DUI. In Minnesota it is a DUI.  In Massachusetts it looks like a DUI on your driving record but does not count as a criminal conviction.
 
2013-12-20 04:21:15 PM  

redmid17: IIRC weed shows up in your system for about three weeks after last smoked, not sure about eating or other methods. I think meth is a few days, but I haven't let my PO check me in months. Hard to test me when I move around from state to state, walking from town to town. Sure the sheriffs always give me shiat, cause I look like a vagrant. I get by though.


They're going to need to draw blood first, though...
 
2013-12-20 04:25:05 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.

I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted


There was a news item not long ago about someone in a big dump truck or something that ran into a bunch of motorcycles stopped at a light, at full speed and killed several. I think we can agree that if you ever leave your parent's basement you deserve to die.
 
2013-12-20 04:58:11 PM  

itcamefromschenectady: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: lennavan: ReapTheChaos: I have to admit, I kind of agree with this. If the guy had rear ended a car, chances are nobody would have gotten hurt. Accidents happen, I may be responsible for it but how is it also my fault if you choose to drive a vehicle that offers you absolutely not protection in an accident?

I feel the same way about people in compact cars when I pull up behind them in my Hummer.  Irresponsible assholes, get a bigger car if you want to be safe.

I feel the same way about people in SUVs when I pull up behind them in my dump truck. Especially if it's after lunch, because that means in usually wasted

There was a news item not long ago about someone in a big dump truck or something that ran into a bunch of motorcycles stopped at a light, at full speed and killed several. I think we can agree that if you ever leave your parent's basement you deserve to die.


I don't know about a dump truck, but I can raise you a drunk cop and "alleged" coverup

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/judge-ready-to-sentenc e- former-impd-officer-david-bisard-for-fatal-2010-drunk-driving-crash
 
2013-12-20 06:34:18 PM  

MadMattressMack: OSHA actively makes and enforces laws requiring those workers to wear day glow / reflective protective suits, helmets, and other PPE while motorcycle groups campaign for the exact opposite.


There are over 60 motorcycle groups in the state of Illinois alone.  Would you care to be a little more specific which ones you are referring to?  Or is this one of those moments where you totally believe the answer is "all of them?"

Ever see someone riding a motorcycle down the freeway at 90mph with no helmet or protective suit, popping wheelies?  You know who hates that guy the most?  Motorcyclists.

But keep on holding that belief that you base on .... absolutely nothing?  movies?  anecdotes?
 
2013-12-20 08:09:44 PM  

Headso: Jim_Callahan: Smart cars, for instance, are designed like the maker is  trying to kill you.

I thought they were actually somewhat safe, not for your image or self esteem of course...


They are probably ok as long as our leader banned all cars and trucks and made everyone buy a Smart car.

Other than that, almost everything on the road, including some motorcycles, will out mass you.
 
2013-12-20 08:18:17 PM  

Harry Freakstorm: Call logs showed that the Granville officers were dispatched at 5:28 p.m., meaning that Krebs' urine was collected two minutes too late. It could not be used as evidence against him.

You know, there is a difference between Dispatched and On the Scene. You can be dispatched at 5:28 but arrive on the scene at 5:55.


If you are anti-gun, you most likely belief you are dispatched at 5:28 and arrive at 5:28, so what does anyone need with a gun in this modern day.
 
2013-12-20 08:26:51 PM  

Headso: Nutsac_Jim: As long as he had a nice AD&D policy I'd cut him some slack.

because he gets a saving throw?


of course.   you load up your wis, that way you can perceive the situation better.
even if you fail your save, you have extra heal available.
 
2013-12-20 09:11:49 PM  
mad cuz there's no justice?

Shoot the offender in the head- you live in the USA, land of guns, wake up!

Or do americans only kill schoolchildren?
 
2013-12-21 12:56:59 AM  

Riche: Tragic all around, but...

Was the driver actually intoxicated at the scene, or was the state interested in charging him with the more serious crime simply because there were detectable amounts of certain substances in his bloodstream?


Explain to why the fark this should matter. He slammed into someone stopped in traffic. Whether he was stone cold sober or drunk off his ass should be irrelevant. Why is it with driving as long as you're sober it's ok if you kill someone? If you shoot someone it's not ok because you were sober. And don't give me any shiat about 'oh, it was just an accident'. The guy he killed was stopped in traffic. There is no excuse for that. If I run around negligently shooting a gun and kill someone I go to jail. Driving like a dumb ass should be a jailable offense too, especially if you kill someone.
 
2013-12-21 12:19:45 PM  
I love how the article provides the guy's address...  I think they are hoping that the general public will do some justice enforcement of their own ;)
 
Displayed 90 of 90 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report